Sentencing Bill Committee: New Clause 30
77Ayes
390Noes
Defeated · majority 313 · Government won183 did not vote
650 Members · Aye 77 · No 390 · DNV 183 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 21 October 2025 on New Clause 30, tabled by Jess Brown-Fuller (Liberal Democrats, Chichester) during the committee stage of the Sentencing Bill. The clause concerned prisoners still held under the Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence, which was abolished in 2012 but which thousands of people remain subject to, many held well beyond their original tariff. The vote was defeated by 390 noes to 77 ayes. The practical effect of the vote is that no provisions addressing the ongoing situation of IPP prisoners were added to the Sentencing Bill at this stage. IPP was a sentence introduced in 2003 that allowed courts to detain offenders indefinitely until they were judged safe to release; it was scrapped in 2012 but the change was not made retrospective. Prisoners still subject to IPP have no fixed release date and must satisfy the Parole Board they no longer pose a risk. By declining to add New Clause 30, the Commons left this population without a legislative route to reform through this Bill. The Liberal Democrats voted almost unanimously in favour, with 65 of their MPs supporting the clause and none voting against. Plaid Cymru and the Greens also voted aye, as did two Labour MPs and three independents. The Conservative Party voted solidly against, with 86 MPs in the no lobby and none supporting the clause. Labour and Labour and Co-operative MPs made up the bulk of the no vote, with 288 combined voting against and only two Labour MPs voting aye. The Democratic Unionist Party and Traditional Unionist Voice also voted no.
Voting Aye meant
Support adding provisions to the Sentencing Bill to tackle the ongoing injustice of IPP prisoners, many of whom have served far beyond their original tariff with no clear route to release.
Voting No meant
Oppose adding IPP prisoner reforms to this Bill at this stage, whether on grounds that the issue requires separate legislation, further review, or that the Bill's scope should not be extended.
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped No
2
264
95
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
86
30
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
64
0
7
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
24
18
Independent
—
4
4
5
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
—
0
1
7
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped No
0
5
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped Aye
4
0
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Your Party
—
2
0
0
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
0
0
1
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
0
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
1
0
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Opposes the Bill as fundamentally undermining law and order by forcing suspended sentences when imprisonment is appropriate; advocates for narrower application of presumption and tougher exclusions for serious offences including knife crime.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (4,517 words) →
Defends the Bill against accusations that it undermines law and order; argues the previous Conservative government nearly collapsed the prison system through poor management.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (255 words) →
Supports McVey's position that the Bill is worse than the previous approach; argues active prison management was preferable to reducing incarceration.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (186 words) →
Concerned that the Bill removes deterrent effect for knife crime; argues sentencing must be carried out and deterrents maintained, citing tragic family impacts in constituencies.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (95 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0